Prevalence of Sagittal Spinal Deformity Among Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundThe important relationship between sagittal spinal alignment and total hip arthroplasty (THA) is becoming well recognized. Prior research has shown a significant relationship between sagittal spinal deformity (SSD) and THA instability. This study aims at determining the prevalence of SSD among preoperative THA patients.MethodsA multicenter database of preoperative THA patients was analyzed. Radiographic parameters measured from standing radiographs included anterior pelvic plane tilt, spinopelvic tilt, and lumbar lordosis (LL); pelvic incidence (PI) was measured from computed tomography scans. Lumbar flatback was defined as PI-LL mismatch >10°, balanced as PI-LL of −10° to 10°, and hyperlordosis as PI-LL <−10°.ResultsA total of 1088 patients were analyzed (mean, 64 years; 48% female). And 59% (n = 644) of patients had balanced alignment, 16% (n = 174) had a PI-LL > 10°, and 4% (n = 46) had a PI-LL > 20° (severe flatback deformity). The prevalence of hyperlordosis was 25% (n = 270). Flatback patients tended to be older than balanced and hyperlordotic patients (69.5 vs 64.0 vs 60.8 years, P < .001). Spinopelvic tilt was more posterior in flatback compared to balanced and hyperlordotic patients (24.7° vs 15.4° vs 7.0°) as was anterior pelvic plane tilt (−7.1° vs −2.0° vs 2.5°) and PI (64.1° vs 56.8° vs 49.0°), all P < .001.ConclusionOnly 59% of patients undergoing THA have normally aligned lumbar spines. Flatback SSD was observed in 16% (4% with severe flatback deformity) and there was a 25% prevalence of hyperlordosis. Lumbar flatback was associated with increasing age, posterior pelvic tilt, and larger PI. The relatively high prevalence of spinal deformity in this population reinforces the importance of considering spinopelvic alignment in THA planning and risk stratification.     

Lumbar Spine Degeneration and Flatback Deformity Alter Sitting-Standing Spinopelvic Mechanics—Implications for Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundSpinal degeneration and lumbar flatback deformity can decrease recruitment of protective posterior pelvic tilt when sitting, leading to anterior impingement and increased instability. We aim at analyzing regional and global spinal alignment between sitting and standing to better understand the implications of spinal degeneration and flatback deformity for hip arthroplasty.MethodsSpinopelvic parameters of patients with full-body sitting-standing stereoradiographs were assessed: lumbar lordosis (LL), spinopelvic tilt (SPT), pelvic incidence minus LL (PI-LL), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and T1 pelvic angle (TPA). Lumbar spines were classified as normal, degenerative (disc height loss >50%, facet arthropathy, or spondylolisthesis), or flatback (degenerative criteria and PI-LL >10°). Independent t-tests and analysis of variance were used to analyze alignment differences between groups.ResultsAfter propensity matching for age, sex, and hip osteoarthritis grade, 57 patients per group were included (62 ± 11 years, 58% female). Mean standing and sitting SPT, PI-LL, SVA, and TPA increased along the spectrum of disease severity. Increasing severity of disease was associated with decreasing standing and sitting LL. The flatback group demonstrated the greatest sitting SPT, PI-LL, SVA, and TPA. The amount of sitting-to-standing change in SPT, LL, PI-LL, SVA, and TPA decreased along the spectrum of disease severity.ConclusionSpinal degeneration and lumbar flatback deformity both significantly decrease lower lumbar spine mobility and posterior SPT from standing to sitting in a stepwise fashion. The demonstrated hypomobility in flatback patients likely serves as a pathomechanism for the previously observed increased risk of dislocation in total hip arthroplasty.     

Total Hip Replacement Influences Spinopelvic Mobility: A Prospective Observational Study

BackgroundAbnormal spinopelvic mobility is identified as a contributing element of total hip arthroplasty (THA) instability. Preoperative identification of THA patients at risk is still a remaining challenge. We therefore conducted this study to (1) evaluate if preoperative and postoperative spinopelvic mobility differs, (2) determine the interactions between the elements of the spinopelvic complex, and (3) identify preoperative parameters for predicting spinopelvic mobility.MethodsA prospective observational study assessing 197 THA patients was conducted with biplanar stereoradiography in standing and relaxed sitting positions preoperatively and postoperatively. Two independent investigators determined spinopelvic mobility based on 2 different classifications (Δ sacral slope [SS] and Δ pelvic tilt [PT]; Δ from standing to sitting; Δ < 10° stiff, Δ ≥ 10°-30° normal, Δ > 30° hypermobile). Multiple regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic analysis were used to identify predictors for postoperative spinopelvic mobility.ResultsSpinopelvic mobility significantly increased after THA based on ΔPT (Pre/Post: 18.5°/22.8°; P < .000) and ΔSS (Pre/Post 17.9°/22.4°; P < .000). A distinct shift in the ratio from stiff (Pre/Post: 24%/9.7%) to hypermobile (Pre/Post: 10.2%/22.1%) mobility postoperatively was observed. Receiver operating characteristic analysis predicted postoperative stiffness using preoperative PT_Standing ≥ 13.0° with a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 51% and hypermobility with preoperative SS_Standing ≥ 35.2° with a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 34%. Age at surgery, preoperative PT_Standing, and pelvic incidence were independent predictors of spinopelvic mobility (R² = 0.24).ConclusionDefinition of preoperative stiffness should be interpreted with caution by arthroplasty surgeons as mobility itself is influenced by THA. For the first time thresholds for standing preoperative parameters for predicting postoperative spinopelvic mobility could be provided. For preoperative standing only lateral assessment could serve as a screening tool for spinopelvic mobility.     

Differences in Spinopelvic Characteristics Between Hip Osteoarthritis Patients and Controls

BackgroundThis study of patients with hip primary osteoarthritis and a matched, asymptomatic, volunteers (controls) group aimed to determine spinopelvic differences between the two groups and their consequences for total hip arthroplasty.Methods104 patients (52 in each group) had their sagittal spinopelvic parameters (lumbar lordosis angle, sacral slope, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, and the pelvic-femoral angle) measured in the standing, relaxed-seated, and deep-flexed seated positions. Spinopelvic movement was calculated as the change between the different positions, and individual spinopelvic mobility was classified in accordance with the change in pelvic tilt as previously described (ΔPT: stiff (<10°), normal (10-30°), and hypermobile (>30°)).ResultsTransitioning from the standing to relaxed-seated position, patients demonstrated 13? less hip flexion (P < .001), 12? more posterior pelvic tilt (P = .006), and 6? more lumbar flexion (P = .038) compared with controls. Transitioning from the standing to deep-flexed seated position, patients demonstrated 18? less hip flexion (P < .001), accompanied by a posterior and not an anterior pelvic tilt as in the controls (7? ± 14 vs ?6? ± 17; P < .001). Patients showed a higher percentage of spinopelvic hypermobility (19% vs 2%; P = .008).ConclusionThe reduced ability of flexion in the arthritic hip, leads to posterior pelvic tilt in the relaxed-seated position. This is associated with a likely compensatory increased lumbar flexion to keep an upright position. Therefore, spinopelvic hypermobility has to be defined as pathologic. When moving to the deep-flexed seated position, decreased flexion of the arthritic hip prevents the pelvis from tilting anteriorly while the lumbar spine performs a compensatory flexion by approximately the same amount compared with controls.Level of EvidenceLevel II, diagnostic study.     

How Does Spinopelvic Mobility and Sagittal Functional Cup Orientation Affect Patient-Reported Outcome 1 Year after THA?—A Prospective Diagnostic Cohort Study

BackgroundThis prospective cohort study aimed to characterize how spinopelvic characteristics change post-total hip arthroplasty (THA) and determine how patient-reported outcome measures are associated with 1) individual spinopelvic mobility and 2) functional sagittal cup orientation post-THA.MethodsOne hundred consecutive patients who received unilateral THAs for end-stage hip osteoarthritis, without spinal pathology were studied. Preoperatively and postoperatively, patients underwent clinical and radiographic evaluations. Patient-reported outcomes were collected using the hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score - physical function shortform (HOOS-PS). Radiographic parameters measured from standing and relaxed-seated radiographs, included the lumbar lordosis angle, pelvic tilt, pelvic femoral angle and cup orientation in the coronal (inclination/anteversion) and sagittal (anteinclination) planes. Spinopelvic mobility was characterized (ΔPT: “stiff” [<10°], “normal” [10°-30°], and “hypermobile” [>30°]).ResultsPreoperative spinopelvic characteristics were not associated with HOOS-PS. Post-THA, the spinopelvic characteristics changed, with less patients having spinopelvic hypermobility (7%) compared with preop (14%). Postoperatively, patients with spinopelvic hypermobility showed significantly worse HOOS-PS scores (21 ± 17 vs 21 ± 22 vs 41 ± 23; ANOVA P = .037). Sagittal but not coronal cup orientation was associated with postoperative spinopelvic characteristics. Cup anteinclination was less in the patients with postoperative spinopelvic hypermobility (27 ± 7° vs 36 ± 8° vs 36 ± 10°; ANOVA: P = .035).ConclusionWe hypothesize that spinopelvic hypermobility is secondary to impingement and reduced hip flexion; to achieve a seated position, impinging hips require more posterior pelvic tilt. Patients with spinopelvic hypermobility are likely impinging secondary to the low cup anteinclination (sagittal malorientation despite optimum coronal orientation) and thus have lower HOOS-PS compared. Sagittal assessments are thus important to adequately study hip mechanics.Level of EvidenceLevel II, diagnostic study.     

Variability in Acetabular Component Position in Patients Undergoing Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty Who Have Concomitant Spine Pathology

BackgroundHip instability following total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be a major cause of revision surgery. Physiological patient position impacts acetabular anteversion and abduction, and influences the functional component positioning. Osteoarthritis of the spine leads to abnormal spinopelvic biomechanics and motion, but there is no consensus on the degree of component variability for THAs performed by anterior approach. Therefore, we sought to present guidelines for changes in acetabular component positioning between supine and standing positions for patients undergoing primary THA by a uniform anterior approach.MethodsPerioperative patient radiographs of the pelvis and lumbar spine were collected. Images were used to determine acetabular component positioning and degree of coexisting spinal pathology, categorized as a Lane Grade (LG). Final analysis of variance was performed on a sample size of 643 anterior primary THAs.ResultsFrom supine to standing position, as the severity of lumbar pathology increased the change in anteversion also increased (LG:0 = ?0.11° ± 4.65°, LG:1 = 2.02° ± 4.09°, LG:2-3 = 5.78° ± 5.72°, P < .001). The mean supine anteversion in patients with absent lumbar pathology was 19.72° ± 5.05° and was lower in patients with worsening lumbar pathology (LG:1 = 18.25° ± 4.81°, LG:2-3 = 16.73° ± 5.28°, P < .001).ConclusionPatients undergoing primary THA by anterior approach with worsening spinal pathology have larger increases in component anteversion when transitioning from supine to standing positions. Consideration should be given to this expected variability when placing the patient’s acetabular component.     

Can Flexed-Seated and Single-Leg Standing Radiographs Be Useful in Preoperative Evaluation of Lumbar Mobility in Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BackgroundThe purpose of this study is to determine whether simulated radiographs in the “flexed-seated” or “step-up” positions better demonstrate a patient’s range of spinopelvic motion between standing and sitting positions than relaxed sitting and standing radiographs.MethodsAn institutional review board approved cohort of 43 patients with hip osteoarthritis whom underwent full body sitting-standing radiographs from August 2016 to December 2017 at a single institution was reviewed. Subjects underwent single-leg step-up standing and flexed-seated radiographs, and relaxed standing and sitting radiographs. Sacral slope, spinopelvic tilt (SPT), and lumbar lordosis were measured in all radiographs. Alignment parameters were compared between both sets of imaging, and the change in SPT between the imaging modalities was plotted and stratified by pre-existing lumbar pathology.ResultsThere were significant differences between the relaxed standing and step-up radiographs and the relaxed and flexed-seated radiographs for sacral slope, SPT, and lumbar lordosis (P < .002 for all), with the exception of SPT in the relaxed and step-up standing postures (P = .110). When transitioning from the standing to sitting position, the mean changes in SPT differed significantly between both sets of radiographs. Most importantly, when plotting changes in SPT between flexed and relaxed sitting postures, patients with fusions and flatback deformity trended toward greater anterior pelvic tilting, a position of greater risk of posterior dislocation.ConclusionFlexed sitting and single-leg standing imaging may emphasize the compensatory mechanisms of patients with concomitant hip and spine pathology more than relaxed imaging using our measurements. Our method may provide insight into high dislocation risk patients compared to the previously published hip measurement method.Level of EvidenceIII.     

Does It Matter: Total Hip Arthroplasty or Lumbar Spinal Fusion First? Preoperative Sagittal Spinopelvic Measurements Guide Patient-Specific Surgical Strategies in Patients Requiring Both

BackgroundIn patients requiring both total hip arthroplasty (THA) and lumbar spinal fusion (LSF), consideration of preoperative sagittal spinopelvic measurements can aid in the prediction of postfusion compensatory changes in pelvic tilt (PT) and inform adjustments to traditional THA cup anteversion. This study aims to identify relationships between spinopelvic measurements and post-THA hip instability and to determine if procedure order reveals a difference in hip dislocation rate.MethodsPatients at a single practice site who received both THA and LSF between 2005 and 2015 (292: 158 = LSF prior to THA, 134 = THA prior to LSF) were retrospectively reviewed for incidents of THA instability. Those with complete radiograph series (89) had their sagittal (standing) spinopelvic profiles measured preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 1.5 years, and 2 years postoperatively. Measured parameters included lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), PT, and sacral slope (SS).ResultsNo significant differences in dislocation rates between operative order groups were elicited (7/73 LSF first, 4/62 THA first; Z = 0.664, P = .509). Compared to nondislocators, dislocators had lower LL (−10.9) and SS (−7.8), and higher PT (+4.3) and PI-LL (+7.3). Additional risk factors for dislocation included sacral fusion (relative risk [RR] = 3.0) and revision fusion (RR = 2.7) . Predictive power of the model generated through multiple regression to characterize individual profiles of post-LSF PT compensation based on perioperative measurements was most significant at 1 year (R² = 0.565, F = 0.000456, P = .028) and 2 years (R² = 0.741, F = 0.031, P = .001) postoperatively.ConclusionIn performing THA after LSF, it is theoretically ideal to proceed with THA at a postfusion interval of at least 1 year, beyond which further compensatory PT change is minimal. However, the order of surgical procedure revealed no statistical difference in hip instability rates. In cases characterized by large PI-LL mismatch (larger or less predictable compensation profiles) or large SS or LL loss (considerably atypical muscle recruitment), consideration of full functional anteversion range between sitting and standing positions to account for abnormalities not appreciated with standing radiographic assessment alone may be warranted.     

Prevalence of Risk Factors for Adverse Spinopelvic Mobility Among Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundPatients with adverse spinopelvic mobility have higher complication rates following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Risk factors include a stiff lumbar spine, standing posterior pelvic tilt ≤ ?10°, and a severe sagittal spinal deformity (pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis mismatch ≥20°). The purpose of this study is to define the spinopelvic risk factors and quantify the prevalence of risk factors for pathologic spinopelvic mobility.MethodsA retrospective cohort analysis from January 2014 to February 2020 was performed on a multicenter series of 9414 primary THAs by 168 surgeons, all with preoperative spinopelvic measurements in the supine, standing, and flex-seated positions. All patients were included. The prevalence of adverse spinopelvic mobility and frequency of each spinopelvic risk factor was calculated.ResultsThe cohort was 52% female, 48% male, with an average age of 65 years. Thirteen percent of patients exhibited adverse spinopelvic mobility and 17% had one or more of the 3 risk factors. Adverse mobility was found in 35% of patients with at least 1 risk factor, 47% with at least 2 risk factors, and 57% with all 3 risk factors.ConclusionForty-six percent of patients had spinopelvic pathology driven by one or more of the risk factors. Number of risk factors present and risk of adverse spinopelvic mobility were positively correlated, with 57% of patients with all 3 risk factors exhibiting adverse spinopelvic mobility. Although this study defines the prevalence of these risk factors in this highly selected cohort, it does not report incidence in a general THA population.Level of EvidencePrognostic Level IV.     

High Prevalence of Spinopelvic Risk Factors in Patients With Post-Operative Hip Dislocations

BackgroundExcessive standing posterior pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar spine stiffness, low pelvic incidence (PI), and severe sagittal spinal deformity (SSD) have been linked to increased dislocation rates. We aimed to determine the prevalence of these 4 parameters in a cohort of unstable total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients and compare these to a large representative control population of primary THA patients.MethodsForty-eight patients with instability following primary THA were compared to a control cohort of 9414 THA patients. Lateral X-rays in standing and flexed-seated positions were used to assess PT and lumbar lordosis (LL). Computed tomography scans were used to measure PI and acetabular cup orientation. Thresholds for “at risk” spinopelvic parameters were standing posterior PT ≤ −15°, lumbar flexion (LL_stand–LL_seated) ≤ 20°, PI ≤ 41°, PI ≥ 70°, and SSD (PI–LL_stand mismatch ≥ 20°).ResultsThere were significant differences in mean spinopelvic parameters between the dislocating and control cohorts (P < .001). There were no differences in mean PI (58° versus 56°, respectively, P = .29) or prevalence of high and low PI between groups. 67% of the dislocating patients had one or more significant risk factors, compared to only 11% of the control. A total of 71% of the dislocating patients had cup orientations within the traditional safe zone.ConclusionExcessive standing posterior PT, low lumbar flexion, and a severe SSD are more prevalent in unstable THAs. Pre-op screening for these parameters combined with appropriate planning and implant selection may help identify at risk patients and reduce the prevalence of dislocation.     

Association of the Psoas Muscle Index and Sagittal Spinal Alignment With Patient-Reported Outcomes After Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up

BackgroundThe aim of this study is to assess the association between a spinopelvic malalignment and patient-reported perception of the hip as being “artificial” after total hip arthroplasty (THA). This is a critical issue as an age-related spinopelvic mismatch has been postulated to be associated with the risk of poor outcomes after THA.MethodsThis is a retrospective case-control study of 274 THAs (244 of whom were women), with a mean follow-up of 6.2 (range 5.0-8.2) years. Hip perception was assessed by asking subjects whether their joint felt “natural” or “artificial.” The association between an artificial perception and the following factors was evaluated: age, gender, psoas muscle index (PMI, cross-sectional area of bilateral psoas at L3 divided by height squared), and spinopelvic measures using logistic regression analysis.ResultsAn artificial hip perception (130 hips, 47.4%) was associated with a lower PMI (P = .016), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement score (P = .035), EuroQol 5-Dimension score (P = .041), and a higher incidence of a pelvic incidence-minus-lumbar lordosis (PI–LL) mismatch >10° (P < .001). A flatback deformity (odds ratio 2.24, 95% confidence interval 1.22-6.31, P = .001) and PMI (odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.34-0.82, P = .012) were predictive of an artificial perception. With the threshold of PI–LL set to 10°, PMI (P = .034), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement score (P < .001), joint perception (P = .020), EuroQol 5-Dimension score (P = .028), pain (P = .031), and satisfaction (P < .001) differed between the 2 groups.ConclusionA flatback deformity is associated with the risk of an artificial perception post-THA, especially in patients with sarcopenia. PMI and PI?LL measurements may help predict THA outcomes.     

The Current Proposed Total Hip Arthroplasty Surgical Planning Guidelines Based on Classification of Spine Stiffness May be Flawed Due to Incorrect Assumptions

BackgroundThe available classifications and preoperative planning tools for total hip arthroplasty assume that: 1) there is no variation in the sagittal pelvic tilt (SPT) if the radiographs are repeated, and 2) there is no significant change in the postoperative SPT postoperatively. We hypothesized that there would be significant differences in postoperative SPT tilt as measured by the sacral slope, thus rendering the current classifications and tools flawed.MethodsThis study was a multicenter, retrospective analysis of preoperative and postoperative (1.5-6 months) full-body imaging of 237 primary total hip arthroplasty (standing and sitting positions). Patients were categorized as 1) stiff spine (standing sacral slope sitting sacral slope < 10°) and 2) normal spine (standing sacral slope-sitting sacral slope ≥ 10°). Results were compared using the paired t-test. The posthoc power analysis showed a power of 0.99.ResultsThe difference in mean standing and sitting sacral slope between the preoperative and postoperative measurements was 1°. However, in standing position, this difference was more than 10° in 14.4% of patients. In the sitting position, this difference was more than 10° in 34.2% of patients and more than 20° in 9.8% of patients. Postoperatively, 32.5% of patients switched groups based on the classification, which rendered the preoperative planning suggested by the current classifications flawed.ConclusionCurrent preoperative planning and classifications are based on a single acquisition of preoperative radiographs without the incorporation of possible postoperative changes in SPT. Validated classifications and planning tools should incorporate repeated measurements to determine the mean and variance in SPT and consider the significant postoperative changes in SPT.     

How do spinopelvic parameters influence patient-reported outcome measurements after lumbar decompression?

BACKGROUND CONTEXTSpinopelvic parameters indicative of sagittal imbalance include a pelvic tilt (PT) greater than 20° and a mismatch between pelvic incidence (PI) and lumbar lordosis (LL) greater than 10°. However, unlike in fusion surgery, the relationship between spinopelvic parameters and patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) in patients undergoing lumbar decompression surgery for neurologic symptoms is less clear.PURPOSETo determine whether PROMs are affected by the amount of residual (postoperative) PI-LL mismatch or PT in patients undergoing one- to three-level lumbar decompression surgeries.DESIGNRetrospective cohort study (Level of Evidence: III).PATIENT SAMPLEPatients undergoing between one to three levels of lumbar decompression surgery at a single, academic institution.OUTCOME MEASURESPROMs—including the PCS-12, MCS-12, ODI, and VAS Back and Leg pain scores—and radiographic measurements of spinopelvic parameters.METHODSPatients were separated into groups based on a postoperative PI-LL mismatch of ≤10° or >10° and a postoperative PT<20° or ≥20°. Absolute PROM scores, the recovery ratio (RR) and the percentage of patients achieving Minimum Clinically Important Difference between groups were compared and a multiple linear regression analysis was performed.RESULTSA total of 167 patients were included, with 27 patients in the PI-LL>10° group and 91 patients in the PT≥20° group. All groups exhibited significant improvement after surgery for each PROM included (p<.05) except for MCS-12 scores in the PI-LL≤10° group and both PT groups. Comparing between groups, all patients were similar with respect to preoperative scores, postoperative scores, change in scores, recovery ratios, and percentage change in Minimum Clinically Important Difference, except that patients with PT≥20° had higher pre- and postoperative VAS Back scores (p=.036 and p=.024, respectively). With multiple linear regression, postoperative PI-LL>10° and PT≥20° were not significant predictors of worse outcomes for any measured PROM.CONCLUSIONSPatients with postoperative measurements PI-LL>10° and PT≥20° without instability had similar PROMs at 1 year after limited lumbar decompression when compared to patients without a spinopelvic mismatch.     

Does Functional Cup Orientation Change at Minimum of 10 Years After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BackgroundCup orientation has been shown to influence the postoperative risk of impingement and dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and may change over time due to changes in pelvic tilt that occur with aging. The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a significant change in acetabular cup inclination and anteversion over a 10-year period following THA.MethodsA retrospective, multisurgeon, single-center cohort study was conducted of 46 patients that underwent THA between 1995 and 2002. A total of 46 patients were included, with a median age at surgery of 56 years, and a median time between initial postoperative radiograph and the most recent one being 13.5 years (minimum 10 years). Cup orientation was measured from postoperative and follow-up supine anterior-posterior pelvic radiographs. Using a validated software, inclination and anteversion were calculated at each interval and the change in cup anteversion and inclination angle was determined. Furthermore, the difference in the sacro-femoral-pubic angle was measured, reflecting the difference in pelvic tilt between intervals.ResultsNo significant difference was detected between measurements taken from initial postoperative radiograph and measurements a minimum of 10 years later (P > .45), with the median (interquartile range) change in anteversion, inclination, and sacro-femoral-pubic being 0° (−1° to 3°), 1° (−3° to 2°), and 0° (−2° to 3°), respectively.ConclusionOur study found no significant change in functional cup orientation a minimum of 10 years after THA. No shifts in functional cup orientation as a result of altering spinopelvic alignment seemed to be present over a 10-year period.     

The Impact of Total Hip Arthroplasty on Pelvic Motion and Functional Component Position is Highly Variable

Background

This study's purpose was to determine the impact of THA implantation on pelvic motion, and to assess motion in patients with a history of lumbar fusion or prosthetic dislocation.

Lack of correlation between hip osteoarthritis and anatomical spinopelvic parameters obtained in supine position on MRI

PurposeHip osteoarthritis (HOA) is known to have a multifactorial pathogenesis. Recent studies suggest that spinopelvic alignment may represent an important additional pathogenic abnormality resulting in HOA. This study aims to assess the correlation between spinopelvic parameters (pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS) and lumbar lordosis (LL)) obtained in the supine position on MRI and HOA, lateral center edge (LCE) angle, and patient reported back pain.MethodsAsymptomatic participants from the whole-body MRI cohort (FF4) from the cross-sectional case-control “Cooperative Health Research in the Region of Augsburg” study (KORA) were included. Whole-body MRI was performed in a standardized fashion in each case, on which hip osteoarthritis (HOA), anatomical spinopelvic parameters and lateral center edge angle were measured. Presence of back pain was assessed using a standardized questionnaire. Correlations were estimated by logistic regression models providing odds ratio.ResultsAmong 340 subjects (mean age 56.3 ± 9.3 years; 56.5% male), HOA was present in 89.1% (male: 87.0%, female: 91.7%, p = 0.17). The LCE angle was 30.0° ± 5.5 (men: 29.8° ± 5.9; women: 30.1° ± 5.1; p = 0.696). Mean PI was 54.0° ± 11.3°, PT was 13.7° ± 5.9°, SS was 40.3° ± 8.8° (significantly smaller in women p<0.05) and LL was 36.4° ± 9.6° (significantly greater in women p<0.05). None of the spinopelvic parameters correlated significantly with hip osteoarthritis or LCE angle. HOA was not correlated with back pain.ConclusionSpinopelvic parameters as measured in the supine position on MRI, do not correlate with hip osteoarthritis or lateral center edge angle.     

Pelvic Tilt Is Minimally Changed by Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background

While surgical navigation offers the opportunity to accurately place an acetabular component, questions remain as to the best goal for acetabular component positioning in individual patients. Overall functional orientation of the pelvis after surgery is one of the most important variables for the surgeon to consider when determining the proper goal for acetabular component orientation.

Questions/Purposes

We measured the variation in pelvic tilt in 30 patients before THA and the effect of THA on pelvic tilt in the same patients more than a year after THA.

Methods

Each patient had a CT study for CT-based surgical navigation and standing and supine radiographs before and after surgery. Pelvic tilt was calculated for each of the radiographs using a novel and validated two-dimensional/three-dimensional matching technique.

Results

Mean supine pelvic tilt changed less than 2°, from 4.4° ± 6.4° (range, ?7.7° to 20.8°) before THA to 6.3° ± 6.6° (range, ?5.7° to 19.6°) after THA. Mean standing pelvic tilt changed less than 1°, from 1.5° ± 7.2° (range, ?13.1° to 12.8°) before THA to 2.0° ± 8.3° (range, ?12.3° to 16.8°) after THA. Preoperative pelvic tilt correlated with postoperative tilt in both the supine (r² = 0.75) and standing (r² = 0.87) positions.

Conclusions

In this population, pelvic tilt had a small and predictable change after surgery. However, intersubject variability of pelvic tilt was high, suggesting preoperative pelvic tilt should be considered when determining desired acetabular component positioning on a patient-specific basis.     

Risk of Dislocation and Revision Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients With Prior Lumbar Fusion With Spinopelvic Fixation

BackgroundThe effect of spinopelvic fixation in addition to lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) on dislocation/instability and revision in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) has not been reported previously.MethodsThe PearlDiver Research Program was used to identify patients aged 30 and above undergoing primary THA who received (1) THA only, (2) THA with prior single-level LSF, (3) THA with prior 2-5 level LSF, or (4) THA with prior LSF with spinopelvic fixation. The incidence of THA revision and dislocation/instability was compared through logistic regression and Chi-squared analysis. All regressions were controlled for age, gender, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI).ResultsBetween 2010 and 2018, 465,558 patients without history of LSF undergoing THA were examined and compared to 180 THA patients with prior spinopelvic fixation, 5,299 with prior single-level LSF, and 1,465 with prior 2-5 level LSF. At 2 years, 7.8% of THA patients with prior spinopelvic fixation, 4.7% of THA patients with prior 2-5 level LSF, 4.2% of THA patients with prior single-level LSF, and 2.2% of THA patients undergoing only THA had a dislocation event or instability (P < .0001). After controlling for length of fusion, pelvic fixation itself was associated with higher independent risk of revision (at 2 years: 2-5 level LSF + spinopelvic fixation: aHR = 3.15, 95% CI 1.77-5.61, P < .0001 vs 2-5 level LSF with no spinopelvic fixation: aOR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.10-1.76, P < .0001).ConclusionAt 2 years, spinopelvic fixation in THA patients were associated with a greater than 3.5-fold increase in hip dislocation risk compared to those without LSF, and an over 2-fold increase in THA revision risk compared to those with LSF without spinopelvic fixation.Level of EvidenceIII.     

Pelvic tilt between supine and standing after total hip arthroplasty an RSA up to seven years after the operation

The pose of the prosthetic components after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is commonly evaluated on conventional radiographs. Any change of the pelvic position after the operation in supine and between supine and standing position with time will influence validity of the measurements. We evaluated the changed pelvic tilt angle (PTA) in supine and standing position up to 7 years after operation. The aims of our study were (a) to evaluate if the PTA change over time after THA, (b) to assess any difference in PTA between supine and standing positions, and (c) to investigate whether factors such as gender, the condition of the opposite hip or low‐back pain have any influence on PTA after THA. Repeated radiostereophotogrammetric radiographs of 106 patients were studied. Patients had been examined in the supine position postoperatively, and in both supine and standing positions at 6 months and 7‐year follow‐up. Measurements of supine patients showed an increasing mean posterior pelvic tilt over time. From supine to standing, the pelvis tilted in the opposite direction. At 6 months, the mean anterior tilt was 3.6° ± 3.8° (confidence interval [CI]: 2.8° to 4.3°) which increased to 6.4° ± 3.9° (CI: 5.7° to 7.2°) at 7 years. The mean changes in pelvic rotations around the longitudinal and sagittal axis were less than 1 degree, in both positions. In individual patients, this change reached about 11.0 degrees in supine and 18.0 degrees when standing.     

Analysis of the Pelvic Functional Orientation in the Sagittal Plane: A Radiographic Study With EOS 2D/3D Technology

Background

We investigated the relationship between pelvic incidence (PI) with anterior pelvic plane angle (APPA), pelvic tilt (PT) angle, and sacral slope (SS) in standing and sitting positions to identify the best parameter expressing the pelvic functional orientation in the sagittal plane.